ArticleCJC open2025
Misclassification of Hypertension Status According to Office Blood Pressure vs 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring.
Article in CJC open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hypertension Detection Using Explainable Stacked Ensemble Machine Learning From Clinical and Physiological Data: A Comprehensive Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Renin-to-Aldosterone Ratio Is Associated with Ambulatory Blood Pressure Levels and Control in Treated Hypertensive Patients with Overweight or Obesity.Obesity facts · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is the gold standard for establishing the diagnosis of hypertension yet remains underused in Canada. There remains a scarcity of Canadian data surrounding how commonly misclassification of hypertension phenotypes occurs without regular use of ABPM. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 964 consecutive adult patients referred to the Ottawa Hospital Hypertension Clinic who underwent same-day ABPM and automated office-based blood pressure measurement (AOBPM) between 2019 and 2023. The proportion of hypertension status misclassification was determined by comparing ABPM and AOBPM values. White coat hypertension (if on no antihypertensive medication) or white coat effect (if on antihypertensive medication) was defined as AOBPM ≥140/90 mm Hg but mean 24-hour ABPM <130/80 mm Hg. Masked hypertension (if on no antihypertensive medication) or masked uncontrolled hypertension (if on antihypertensive medication) was defined as AOBPM <140/90 mm Hg but mean 24-hour ABPM ≥130/80 mm Hg. Results: The mean (SD) age was 60 (16) years, and 46% of the patients were female. Among 296 patients with normotension or controlled hypertension based on ABPM, 146 (49%) met criteria for white coat hypertension (n = 21) or white coat effect (n = 125). Among 668 patients with uncontrolled hypertension based on ABPM, 364 (54%) met criteria for masked hypertension (n = 65) or masked uncontrolled hypertension (n = 299). Conclusions: The hypertension status of approximately 50% of patients was misclassified by AOBPM vs ABPM. Broader use of ABPM in Canada will improve hypertension awareness, treatment, and control rates.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.